Why You Should Refuse Chemotherapy

There must be a very compelling reason why a bag of chemotherapy must be handled with gloves.

As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.

– Alan Nixon, Ph.D. , Past President, American Chemical Society.

75% Physicians Won’t Take Chemotherapy
The great lack of trust is evident even amongst doctors. Polls and questionnaires show that three doctors out of four (75 per cent) would refuse any chemotherapy because of its ineffectiveness against the disease and its devastating effects on the entire human organism. This is what many doctors and scientists have to say about chemotherapy:

“The majority of the cancer patients in this country die because of chemotherapy, which does not cure breast, colon or lung cancer. This has been documented for over a decade and nevertheless doctors still utilize chemotherapy to fight these tumors.”

(Allen Levin, MD, UCSF, “The Healing of Cancer”, Marcus Books, 1990).

“If I were to contract cancer, I would never turn to a certain standard for the therapy of this disease. Cancer patients who stay away from these centers have some chance to make it.”

“Dr. Hardin Jones, lecturer at the University of California, after having analyzed for many decades statistics on cancer survival, has come to this conclusion: ‘… when not treated, the patients do not get worse or they even get better’. The unsettling conclusions of Dr. Jones have never been refuted”.

(Walter Last, “The Ecologist”, Vol. 28, no. 2, March-April 1998)

“Many oncologists recommend chemotherapy for almost any type of cancer, with a faith that is unshaken by the almost constant failures”.

“Our most efficacious regimens are loaded with risks, side effects and practical problems; and after all the patients we have treated have paid the toll, only a miniscule percentage of them is paid off with an ephemeral period of tumoral regression and generally a partial one”

“After all, and for the overwhelming majority of the cases, there is no proof whatsoever that chemotherapy prolongs survival expectations. And this is the great lie about this therapy, that there is a correlation between the reduction of cancer and the extension of the life of the patient”.

“Several full-time scientists at the McGill Cancer Center sent to 118 doctors, all experts on lung cancer, a questionnaire to determine the level of trust they had in the therapies they were applying; they were asked to imagine that they themselves had contracted the disease and which of the six current experimental therapies they would choose. 79 doctors answered, 64 of them said that they would not consent to undergo any treatment containing cis-platinum – one of the common chemotherapy drugs they used – while 58 out of 79 believed that all the experimental therapies above were not accepted because of the ineffectiveness and the elevated level of toxicity of chemotherapy.”

“Doctor Ulrich Able, a German epidemiologist of the Heidelberg Mannheim Tumor Clinic, has exhaustively analyzed and reviewed all the main studies and clinical experiments ever performed on chemotherapy …. Able discovered that the comprehensive world rate of positive outcomes because of chemotherapy was frightening, because, simply, nowhere was scientific evidence available demonstrating that chemotherapy is able to ‘prolong in any appreciable way the life of patients affected by the most common type of organ cancer.’ Able highlights that rarely can chemotherapy improve the quality of life, and he describes it as a scientific squalor while maintaining that at least 80 per cent of chemotherapy administered in the world is worthless. Even if there is no scientific proof whatsoever that chemotherapy works, neither doctors nor patients are prepared to give it up (Lancet, Aug. 10, 1991). None of the main media has ever mentioned this exhaustive study: it has been completely buried”

(Tim O’Shea, “Chemotherapy – An Unproven Procedure”)

“According to medical associations, the notorious and dangerous side effects of drugs have become the fourth main cause of death after infarction, cancer, and apoplexy”

( Journal of the American Medical Association, April 15, 1998)

Chemo drugs destroy brain cells
Drugs used to destroy cancer cells may actually be more harmful to healthy cells in the brain, research suggests.

A team from New York’s University of Rochester found several types of key brain cell were highly vulnerable to the drugs.

They say it might help explain side effects such as seizures and memory loss associated with chemotherapy – collectively dubbed “chemo” brain. The research, on mice, is published in the Journal of Biology.

Drug therapy for cancer can prompt a wide range of neurological side effects, even the onset of dementia. But they were thought not to be directly linked to the drug treatment itself. Instead, some doctors have put them down to the patient’s vulnerable psychological state.

The latest study found that dose levels typically used when treating patients killed 40% to 80% of cancer cells – 70% to 100% of brain cells. Several types of healthy brain cell continued to die for at least six weeks after exposure.

Common drugs tested
Lead researcher Dr Mark Noble said: “This is the first study that puts chemo brain on a sound scientific footing, in terms of neurobiology and cellular biology.”The Rochester team carried out tests with three drugs used to treat a wide range of cancers: carmustine, cisplatin and cytosine arabinoside.

All three drugs were toxic to several types of brain cell whose job is to repair other cells in the brain – even at very low concentrations. They also killed off oligodenrocyte cells, which play a key role in the transmission of messages around the nervous system.

The researchers suggest damage to cells in the hippocampus, which is responsible for memory and learning, is most likely to explain chemo brain symptoms. Professor John Toy, Cancer Research UK’s medical director, said:

“The doses of therapy needed to treat cancer while leaving the body’s healthy cells as unharmed as possible is a fine balance judged by experienced specialists.

They aim to maximise benefits and minimise damage. Unfortunately side-effects can include toxicity to the brain. “

This research in mice may hopefully suggest new ways of researching how this toxicity might be overcome.

“It is important to remember, however, that all presently available cancer treatments have gone through extensive clinical trials to ensure that their benefits outweigh unwanted effects. “No patient should stop their treatment because of this research.”

The researchers said it might be possible to add protective agents to chemotherapy drugs. They also suggest further work to pinpoint which cells are most at risk.

I’m an Oncologist on the point of retirement, so I’ve seen it all (well, most of it). When chemo ‘works’, it really is great stuff, and the relief from the cancer symptoms makes the toxicity bearable. When it doesn’t, it’s absolutely miserable and you’d have been much better off without it. The trouble is, you don’t know if it’s going to work or not before you try it (in most cases anyway). A lot of the clinical trials in the common cancers show relatively small improvements in survival, and because the cases in the trials are highly selected to be most likely to do well, the results in the ‘normal’ population will not be as good, and the side-effects worse. Ask about the trial results (and ask to see the graphs of survival with and without chemo if you can interpret them yourself) before making a decision. Very few of my patients do that though, even if offered, as they find it too scarey.

Two months after my operation, the first thing this urologist told me was “why I did not follow his prescription” and then he started to threaten me the worst complications. I interrupted him, asking why he had not asked how I was doing after the operation.The health system is well organized in Spain, except that the majority of doctors who works there are more involved follow the rules of the protocol than auscultate the patients.This kind of medicine starts to look like in the army where the officers give orders and the soldiers just to obey. So I will never follow chemo.

I was diagnosed with breast cancer and had my left breast removed along with 3 lymph nodes including the sentinel node. The pathology on the nodes were negative. I was still referred to oncology as protocol. He wanted to start me on a 3 month regimen every three weeks for 6 hours each time. After going home, I thought about it and decided to refuse chemo. I feel really really great right now although its only been 2 weeks since surgery. I have a life to live and I want to live it, Chemo is no cure for cancer.and I refuse to fill my body with these horrific chemicals. I don’t want to second guess myself so I am remaining positive that I made the right decision

I was diagnosed with breast cancer in both breasts (1cm), lumpectomy/radiation, but no chemo or tamoxifen in 2006. Prayed for healing, lost 30 lbs with exercise, went food flexitarian, but with strict rules no products with hormones, artificial junk. vitamin D and and vitamin B complex. the medical staff wanted me to have chemo, cut my breasts off, take drugs. I still remember their disappointed faces at me. But I read enough info that chemo and tamoxifen not 100%. I am here in 2017, I have effects from the lumpectomy & radiation and it is manageable. still exercising, praying, no stress, eat well, and being grateful/enjoying what I have.

So I was diagnosed with Stage I DCIS. Had a lumpectomy. 1.2cm tumor removed. Clean margins, did not spread to lymphnodes. Surgeon said it was the best possible outcome. But now medicine oncologist wants me to have chemo. I don’t think I should. Your thoughts?

I wouldn’t make any health recommendations for anyone, but personally, I’d never do chemo or radiation. There are too many other safer, more effective ways to treat cancer. One of the biggest things is to detox, give the body the nutrients it needs, and to stop exposing yourself to toxins in your personal environment. Much harder than it sounds because a lot of our foods, water and personal care products are loaded full of toxic chemicals and substances.